All I know is the extra Torque wont make the car any faster over a equal HP Bolt-On car at least this hasn't been proved yet. And in a circuit race the Torque is in a area of the curve that won't help much. The only + the stroker might have is being to make bolt on-power without going catless. But unless the car can pass smog its pointless.

What was expected? For a slight increase in displacement you will see only as light increase in power. Did you expect 500 hp from this kit? Price aside, the kit did what it was designed to do, shift torque vertically upward. The stock exhaust hurt a lot too.

What was expected? For a slight increase in displacement you will see only as light increase in power. Did you expect 500 hp from this kit? Price aside, the kit did what it was designed to do, shift torque vertically upward. The stock exhaust hurt a lot too.

Now for the price, complete fail.

Honestly, expecting a whole lot more.

This is a 4.6 liter V8 we are talking about here. Bolt on cars hit these peak numbers. Have you seen the Sharkwerks 3.9 liter GT3? That motor hits 450 wheel from LESS displacement and 2 less cylinder. That is something that is worth the money for awesome NA power, this... well, this is a waste. There is way more potential here just that RDsport isn't capable of extracting it.

What was expected? For a slight increase in displacement you will see only as light increase in power. Did you expect 500 hp from this kit? Price aside, the kit did what it was designed to do, shift torque vertically upward. The stock exhaust hurt a lot too.

Now for the price, complete fail.

For 22k yes I expected a whole lot more considering you can purchase a supercharger from Gintani or ESS and easily crack 500whp for way less than that. Mind you this is 380whp on a dynojet which reads high anyway.

For 22k yes I expected a whole lot more considering you can purchase a supercharger from Gintani or ESS and easily crack 500whp for way less than that. Mind you this is 380whp on a dynojet which reads high anyway.

It cant be a high reading dynojet if stock it put down 338 whp. I don't know about this car, but Im sure it is barely broken in if it did not have the final bolt ons installed or ecu software done. My RD Sport stroker was putting down just over 440 whp sae on a dynojet with 93, however, from what I know, my car was the one putting the most power down from all the ones built. Its ran 169.7 MPH in a standing mile event here in FL last year, where the 490 whp renntech C63 had ran 174 MPH the same day. I sold it for a MK2 GT3, only because I wanted a better track car. The M3 was a 4200 lbs convertible....

Also, its ridiculous to compare HP gains and "for the money factor" of NA Vs FI..... 2 different animals. If I still had the M3, would I do the stroker again...no. Would I do an S/C kit... no. I'd sell the M3 and buy a better platform/performance car... Even just between a S/C kit, exhaust, wheels, bodykit, and other BS, one could easily blow over $25K (closer to $30K); just to keep up (performance wise) with a car that cost $25K (more or less) more than an M3.... doesn't make sense...

It cant be a high reading dynojet if stock it put down 338 whp. I don't know about this car, but Im sure it is barely broken in if it did not have the final bolt ons installed or ecu software done. My RD Sport stroker was putting down just over 440 whp sae on a dynojet with 93, however, from what I know, my car was the one putting the most power down from all the ones built. Its ran 169.7 MPH in a standing mile event here in FL last year, where the 490 whp renntech C63 had ran 174 MPH the same day. I sold it for a MK2 GT3, only because I wanted a better track car. The M3 was a 4200 lbs convertible....

Also, its ridiculous to compare HP gains and "for the money factor" of NA Vs FI..... 2 different animals. If I still had the M3, would I do the stroker again...no. Would I do an S/C kit... no. I'd sell the M3 and buy a better platform/performance car... Even just between a S/C kit, exhaust, wheels, bodykit, and other BS, one could easily blow over $25K; just to keep up (performance wise) with a car that cost $25K (more or less) more than an M3.... doesn't make sense...

This is well said, obviously hp per $ won't be the same.

However, the argument is more along the lines of the hp gain over bolt on's for the $. Even if one wants to stay NA and spend the cash, is it enough of a gain for that amount of cash? In my opinion, no.

Honestly, with a 13k sc kit on an M3 you are running 130 trap speeds, what is keeping up with you exactly? That is a strong performance platform.

However, the argument is more along the lines of the hp gain over bolt on's for the $. Even if one wants to stay NA and spend the cash, is it enough of a gain for that amount of cash? In my opinion, no.

Honestly, with a 13k sc kit on an M3 you are running 130 trap speeds, what is keeping up with you exactly? That is a strong performance platform.

Everyone knows that the 4.6 stroker is supposed to give ONLY about 100 HP over stock. 414 HP to about 520 HP. And everyone knows that one could get close to 50 whp with full bolt ons, which the stroker includes to obtain the power, so the other 50 whp comes from the 15% increased displacement. The displacement will allow for a larger % gains of the bolt ons over a stock motor, if tuned properly. There is no mystery behind it. I don't see what the fuss is about and its ridiculous to see people expect more than what its supposed to do. Its NA. There is no option to run higher boost or anything. Its an NA motor, and thats just the way it works. At the end of the day, every 4.6 "should" be putting down 100 whp over stock (120 crank over stock). Thats it. There is no magic to it. The customers that get this done understand this, and when fully done, it puts down almost as much TQ as stage 1/2 S/C kits. My stroker was putting down almost 350 wtq.... If I wanted to, I would not get traction from 1st through half of 3rd with 305 ps2 tires in the rear (19x11 dymags)....

PG's acceleration times are flawed since it seems he cant shift for $#@!.

Different platforms have different dynamics, weight, grip and gearing. That same day, I ran a 516 whp/536wtq 997 tt from 2nd gear and at 160-170mph he only got 1 car length on me, however from 1st gear, I was ahead by 1 car length by 170 mph (My GT3 then was at 414 sae whp/305 wtq, that dyno is not posted here since the final Evoms tuning is not yet completed, but the exhaust only are posted here in my garage). The 997 TT is Mike@AWD on 6speed. He was very surprised. His car ran 11.5 @ 125 mph at a dragstrip recently, without really launching it.

What was your ET in that 130 mph run, sticky? My point is that power is nothing without good traction, and trap speeds are not the final word on performance.

IMO, a nice, clean 07 997 TT with only 5k-8K miles for $80K-$85K, would be a better option than buying an M3 and spending $25K-$30K on it. Thats just my opinion after having gone down that road...

Everyone knows that the 4.6 stroker is supposed to give ONLY about 100 HP over stock. 414 HP to about 520 HP. And everyone knows that one could get close to 50 whp with full bolt ons, which the stroker includes to obtain the power, so the other 50 whp comes from the 15% increased displacement. The displacement will allow for a larger % gains of the bolt ons over a stock motor, if tuned properly. There is no mystery behind it. I don't see what the fuss is about and its ridiculous to see people expect more than what its supposed to do. Its NA. There is no option to run higher boost or anything. Its an NA motor, and thats just the way it works. At the end of the day, every 4.6 "should" be putting down 100 whp over stock (120 crank over stock). Thats it. There is no magic to it. The customers that get this done understand this, and when fully done, it puts down almost as much TQ as stage 1/2 S/C kits. My stroker was putting down almost 350 wtq.... If I wanted to, I would not get traction from 1st through half of 3rd with 305 ps2 tires in the rear (19x11 dymags)....

PG's acceleration times are flawed since it seems he cant shift for $#@!.

130 mph trap is a strong car, no matter what car it is. My friend's stock LP-560 ran 11.066 @ 130.7 mph 1/4 mile. My Modded GT3 ran 11.307 @ 118.5 mph 1/4 mile the same day, and on the highway pulls we were almost dead even until 155+ mph. My GT3, however, weights 2950 lbs with half tank of gas.... Different platforms have different dynamics, grip and gearing... That same day, I ran a 516 whp/536wtq 997 tt from 2nd gear and at 160-170mph he only got 1 car length on me, however from 1st gear, I was ahead by 1 car length by 170 mph (My GT3 then was at 414 sae whp/305 wtq, that dyno is not posted here since the final Evoms tuning is not yet completed, but the exhaust only are posted here in my garage). The 997 TT is Mike@AWD on 6speed. He was very surprised. His car ran 11.5 @ 125 mph at a dragstrip recently, without really launching it.

What was your ET in that 130 mph run, sticky? My point is that power is nothing without good traction, and trap speeds are not the final word on performance.

IMO, a nice, clean 07 997 TT with only 5k-8K miles for $80K-$85K, would be a better option than buying an M3 and spending $25K-$30K on it. Thats just my opinion after having gone down that road...

It just depends on your perspective, a 997tt used to be a lot more money. Now they have dropped to the price of a brand new fully loaded DCT + a blower. But, that is a brand new car.

You can just as well get a used M3 and put on a blower for under 60k. Still a matter of more for your money. A 997TT needs some mods to hang with a blown M3, not cheap mods either. Additionally, what if you want RWD? You are screwed. What if you want DCT? Well then, now we are talking 130k for the turbo, right?

ET does not change power, power is power. A drag race is not always when you want it, sometimes you are on the highway. How about the 60-130 times for blown M3's? Hooking up at the strip to get the best ET is not easy, but I can tell you it is not like I had trouble with it on the street or could not use it.

Absolutely, it is NA, but don't tell me you look at these dyno resutls and don't consider them pathetic yourself. If you had these numbers, you would have flipped out. Don't tell me I'm wrong, I know I'm right on that. A bit unfortunate that PG is associated with stroker performance as well.

I would have to agree with GT3 here. There really isn't any guesswork, the 0.6 liters of displacement extra can only net you so much more power. More power NA will always cost you more no matter what, that's the nature of dealing with atmospheric pressure and the law of diminishing returns. Is it cost effective? Hells no! But then why do people build NA honda B16 motors and make 300 whp with them when they can do it for 1/4 the cost of a boosted motor.

The results sort of speak for themselves. If I had 25k to drop on an extra 0.6 liters of displacement, I would do a quick hand calculation and see that it will only net me about 370-380 whp when all said and done, which is exactly what we see here; so in all fairness I wouldn't be disappointed or surprised, that is what is expected.

I would have to agree with GT3 here. There really isn't any guesswork, the 0.6 liters of displacement extra can only net you so much more power. More power NA will always cost you more no matter what, that's the nature of dealing with atmospheric pressure and the law of diminishing returns. Is it cost effective? Hells no! But then why do people build NA honda B16 motors and make 300 whp with them when they can do it for 1/4 the cost of a boosted motor.

The results sort of speak for themselves. If I had 25k to drop on an extra 0.6 liters of displacement, I would do a quick hand calculation and see that it will only net me about 370-380 whp when all said and done, which is exactly what we see here; so in all fairness I wouldn't be disappointed or surprised, that is what is expected.

Boost > NA and we all know that Sticky

The issue is not that we are expecting unrealistic numbers from the 4.6, but certainly better than this. No one is going to be happy with 380 whp from that, period.

No one is going to debate NA power is more $, we all know.

Who is going to defend ~40 whp for over $23k? This should show more, a lot more. The tuning here needs to be better, that is clearly a weak point. This setup has a hell of a lot more potential that is not being utilized. Look at how the torque drops off faster with the stroker. Where are the cams to address this? I just don't consider this a very good package and I don't consider RDsport very good at maximizing the potential here. I think GT3 would agree with this last part.

It just depends on your perspective, a 997tt used to be a lot more money. Now they have dropped to the price of a brand new fully loaded DCT + a blower. But, that is a brand new car.

You can just as well get a used M3 and put on a blower for under 60k. Still a matter of more for your money. A 997TT needs some mods to hang with a blown M3, not cheap mods either. Additionally, what if you want RWD? You are screwed. What if you want DCT? Well then, now we are talking 130k for the turbo, right?

ET does not change power, power is power. A drag race is not always when you want it, sometimes you are on the highway. How about the 60-130 times for blown M3's? Hooking up at the strip to get the best ET is not easy, but I can tell you it is not like I had trouble with it on the street or could not use it.

Absolutely, it is NA, but don't tell me you look at these dyno resutls and don't consider them pathetic yourself. If you had these numbers, you would have flipped out. Don't tell me I'm wrong, I know I'm right on that. A bit unfortunate that PG is associated with stroker performance as well.

The 997 TT was used as an example. A 2007 5K-8K mile car, is technically a new car. It would be one year older than a 2008 M3 with probably more miles. There are plenty of other similar cars. Yes, they have dropped since we all bought M3's back in 2008, but I was referring to anyone who was planing to buy an M3 now, or had one and planed to fully modded whether FI or NA. That 997 TT with 516 whp and 536 wtq only has evoms tune and intake filter I believe.... Not bad and not expesive to do. If one is looking for mainly straight acceleration times like traps, 60-130, RWD or AWD does not matter sticky. When putting that much HP and for the purpose stated above, AWD is actually better. There a tiptronic, low miles, 997 TT for $80K or so as well. Im just using that car as an example.

"ET does not change power, power is power", Well of course Sticky. But please, give me some insight as to how my 414 whp 6 speed GT3 had a near identical ET as a 560HP e-gear LP-560? How are our 1 mile speeds different by 5 miles per hour and our 1/4 miles ET's different by less than 0.3 of a second? Or the outcome of the 2 races against the 516 whp/ 536 wtq 997 TT? Power is power, but my car with less power did what it did on the same day against this more power full cars. Please explain how, and you "power is power" comment will hold no value. Power will always be power, but based on these results, power is not everything. I waiting to know what was your 130 mph ET time Sticky.....

This RD Sport dyno cannot be looked upon as the final results; because its not. Its a barely broken in NEW motor. After a couple of thousand miles when it loosens up, it will put down about 10 hp more, and then with the full bolt ons and ecru, it will be around 440 whp..... and you know this, since it currently still has stock headers, stock cats, stock exhaust and stock ecru. Maybe even stock air filter still. Now if those were the final results and I was the owner of the car, someone would be paying the a visit, but its not the final results and I first hand know that my car, when fully done put down 440-450 whp, right on point. Now, its the extra 40 lbs of torque and extra 50 whp with the extra $12K Vs the money spent on a bolt on, not to everyone, but its the only way if one does not want FI.